|
Belgium selects F-35 over Typhoon
Belgium has selected the F-35 over the Eurofighter Typhoon. Cheers https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/belg...et/?no_cache=1 |
Brave Belgium. That will screw their Defence Budget. |
34 aircraft and four spare engines. I presume that there is actually a contract for ongoing engine overhaul and the four spares just act as the rotating buffer? I guess that is enough, if they accept lots of grounded aircraft in times of high aircraft utilisation, such as a war! :rolleyes:
OAP |
Originally Posted by Onceapilot
(Post 10289675)
I guess that is enough, if they accept lots of grounded aircraft in times of high aircraft utilisation, such as a war! :rolleyes:
OAP |
It could be they need a few more of them? ;)
OAP |
Originally Posted by chopper2004
(Post 10289666)
Belgium has selected the F-35 over the Eurofighter Typhoon. Cheers https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/belg...et/?no_cache=1 |
Difficult to see Typhoon getting many more orders.
Fantastic jet but very expensive and of course it isn't 5th Generation... |
Originally Posted by Onceapilot
(Post 10289675)
34 aircraft and four spare engines. I presume that there is actually a contract for ongoing engine overhaul and the four spares just act as the rotating buffer? I guess that is enough, if they accept lots of grounded aircraft in times of high aircraft utilisation, such as a war! :rolleyes:
OAP |
Originally Posted by GlobalNav
(Post 10289940)
When was the last time Belgium went to war? When was the last time they had a difficult budget to pay for? Reality.
https://www.blogbeforeflight.net/201...sis-daesh.html |
Originally Posted by Buster15
(Post 10289733)
Difficult to see Typhoon getting many more orders.
Fantastic jet but very expensive and of course it isn't 5th Generation... I suspect tha the Qatar and Omani orders may well be the last. Shame we didn’t buy Super Hornets, far better in most respects with much more customer focussed support. |
Originally Posted by F-16GUY
(Post 10289967)
Kleine-Brogel, Dec. 26, 2017 - Early this morning, four Belgian combat aircraft took off from an air base in the middle east for the last time. The fighter jets have taken the road back to Belgium after 18 months of operations over Syria and Iraq. This marks the end of the Desert Falcon mission for the F-16. |
Brave Belgium. That will screw their Defence Budget. |
One could follow the roads (IFR NAV) back to Belgium could they not?:E
|
And Rafale?
Be interesting to see how this affects Rafale. Dassault struggling to sort the hugely reduced India order due, I’m led to believe by offset issues. And if Typhoon is allegedly gen 4.5, what can Dassault do to the French fleet to keep them part of the night one day one team that their politicians still seem to want when the entry level is F35? Heard a lot of French senior airmen saying stealth is irrelevant, but that could possibly be because they don’t have the capability. Guess we just need the Germans to tilt towards F35 and the European club is almost complete without France. A voir..... |
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 10290128)
With these to be delivered in the mid-2020s at the earliest, the F-35A will be significantly cheaper to procure and operate than any of the competition by then,
|
Shame we didn’t buy Super Hornets, far better in most respects with much more customer focussed support. |
"Shame we didn’t buy Super Hornets, far better in most respects...."
How, exactly? Not in terms of being able to defeat the perceived threat, which seems to be the key..... |
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
(Post 10291174)
"Shame we didn’t buy Super Hornets, far better in most respects...."
How, exactly? Not in terms of being able to defeat the perceived threat, which seems to be the key..... OAP |
Onceapilot,
What perceived threat? As we are buying BOTH Typhoon and F-35 surely we have all bases covered? |
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10291186)
Onceapilot,
What perceived threat? As we are buying BOTH Typhoon and F-35 surely we have all bases covered? The UK F-35 buy has been lynched by the Admirals and misguided Pollies for an inappropriate expeditionary warfare UK capability. OAP |
Was the decision to go with the F-35 due to the Ski Ramp design of the Carrier....or did the decision to buy the F-35 STVOL drive the design of the carrier?
|
Onceapilot,
Says you. SASless, I think the decision to go with STVOL F-35 drove the carrier design. |
Proone,
If you have a valid point, make it. Don't fish for a response then parrot back a silly comment. :) OAP |
Just how large an "expeditionary" warfare capability does the F-35 purchase by the UK provide?
As an aside....how much of a defense can the F-35 force provide should the Russians decide to come west and take up residence by force? Are we talking about a bit of sacrifice for National Pride on the one hand....and a pipe dream on the other? Good is fine....but it takes numbers to last in a war. |
Onceapilot,
Don't be silly. SASLess, Two squadrons of F-35's on one or two carriers provides a significant expeditionary capability. Should the Russians decide to come west and take up residence the reply will be Trident and NOT F-35's! Which is why they won't. |
Originally Posted by Pure Pursuit
(Post 10290029)
it’s not even 4.5.... I suspect tha the Qatar and Omani orders may well be the last. Shame we didn’t buy Super Hornets, far better in most respects with much more customer focussed support. Anyway the Customer Support statement is a surprise (to me anyway). Quite a thing to say if it is aimed at BAE. I Had heard that Boeing provided poor levels of support. |
Jacko, Given the choice - against any current threat - I would take APG-79 plus MIDS JTRS over anything the Typhoon has today or will have tomorrow. |
Not convinced by the WFoV afforded by a repositioner, tomorrow, Orca? Not convinced by Meteor today? Not convinced that you might need Typhoon's kinematic performance advantage?
|
Errr. No. I’d rather have high quality tracks at proven AESA ranges and the ability to share them with whomsoever I please. |
Originally Posted by orca
(Post 10291616)
Errr. No. I’d rather have high quality tracks at proven AESA ranges and the ability to share them with whomsoever I please. OAP |
Unseen - likely to be a pickle in any aeroplane and far less likely in a AESA equipped fully linked aeroplane than a mech scan with a basic MIDS fit. Oh and for the late spot - I’d gladly take the AIM-9X and JHMCS combo to that knife fight. |
Originally Posted by orca
(Post 10291628)
Unseen - likely to be a pickle in any aeroplane and far less likely in a AESA equipped fully linked aeroplane than a mech scan with a basic MIDS fit. Oh and for the late spot - I’d gladly take the AIM-9X and JHMCS combo to that knife fight. OAP |
Just quickly explain how that happens and when...and how it varies from aircraft type to aircraft type? Not sure I get your banter. I do think that getting into a tussle where post commit you end up with no munitions, and can’t run, and can’t be of use with sensors and link...is far more likely if you have poor sensors and sub optimal link... |
Not trying to be too clever but, if you say "I am happy with better missiles/sensors/sights", how about when 1 bogey turns up more than you have missiles and you can't run away?
OAP |
No gun....no fighter! The F-4 proved that in Vietnam |
Another interesting aspect about the LO "stealth" hugely expensive fighter/bombers is that they seem to be pretty much creatures of the night. Optical/IR in day/VFR seems to remain a vulnerability. Maybe the LO empire is night precision bombing but day fighting could still be owned by high spec Typhoon in much greater numbers for your $. Anyway, it is all probably wasted. Eastern doctrine seems to be leaning heavily towards first use of nuke missiles if they feel the need. With no ABM or dispersed capability, there would soon be no defence. :uhoh:
OAP |
OAP, I know at one time BAE experimented with day LO using adaptive lighting.
|
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10291207)
SASless, I think the decision to go with STVOL F-35 drove the carrier design. If we went cat and trap we would have needed and angled deck, etc and a system for powering the cat whereas a ramp was cheaper. So it was really money rather than capability. Cat&trap got you a cheaper more capable variant. Ramp got you a cheaper deck and more versatile and expensive aircraft. |
Or.....could ya'll just not part with the Harrier tradition and thus went with another "Jump Jet" design?
That surely drove the USMC's thinking I believe. |
It would certainly have been a factor hence my versatility comment. Also with only one deck cat&trap doesn't give you any redundancy. At least you are not as dependent on ship speed, there are more landing spots if someone messes up, and ultimately probably a lot more emergency decks around. 'Over the side' was an expedient way of getting a clear deck when aircraft were cheap and plentiful.
I might also say that we have a history of major reconstruction through life so adding catobar and an angled deck would not be impossible in 20 years time. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 21:39. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.